Positive association of angiotensin II receptor blockers, not angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, with an increased vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients hospitalized for suspected COVID-19 pneumonia

Renin-Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Revealing Critical Bias Across a Body of Observational Research

Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction between RAAS inhibitor use and COVID-19 risk. This study assessed the extent of bias in that research and reevaluated RAAS inhibitor-COVID-19 associations in studies without critical risk of bias. Methods and Results Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (December 1, 2019 to October 21, 2021) identifying studies that compared the risk of infection and/or severe COVID-19 outcomes between those using or not using RAAS inhibitors (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers). Weighted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were extracted and pooled in fixed-effects meta-analyses, only from studies without critical risk of bias that assessed severe COVID-19 outcomes. Of 169 relevant studies, 164 had critical risks of bias and were excluded. Ultimately, only two studies presented data relevant to the meta-analysis. In 1 351 633 people with uncomplicated hypertension using a RAAS inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide diuretic in monotherapy, the risk of hospitalization (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87; P<0.001; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; P=0.015) and intubation or death (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85; P=0.002; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95; P=0.019) with COVID-19 was lower in those using a RAAS inhibitor. However, these protective effects are probably not clinically relevant. Conclusions This study reveals the critical risk of bias that exists across almost an entire body of COVID-19 research, raising an important question: Were research methods and/or peer-review processes temporarily weakened during the surge of COVID-19 research or is this lack of rigor a systemic problem that also exists outside pandemic-based research? Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021237859.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme (ACE) Inhibitors May Moderate COVID-19 Hyperinflammatory Response: An Observational Study with Deep Immunophenotyping

Background

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARB), the most commonly prescribed antihypertensive medications, counter renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) activation via induction of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression. Considering that ACE2 is the functional receptor for SARS-CoV-2 entry into host cells, the association of ACEi and ARB with COVID-19 outcomes needs thorough evaluation.

Methods

We conducted retrospective analyses using both unmatched and propensity score (PS)-matched cohorts on electronic health records (EHRs) to assess the impact of RAAS inhibitors on the risk of receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and 30-day mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Additionally, we investigated the immune cell gene expression profiles of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with prior use of antihypertensive treatments from an observational prospective cohort.

Results

The retrospective analysis revealed that there was no increased risk associated with either ACEi or ARB use. In fact, the use of ACEi showed decreased risk for mortality. Survival analyses using PS-matched cohorts suggested no significant relationship between RAAS inhibitors with a hospital stay and in-hospital mortality compared to non-RAAS medications and patients not on antihypertensive medications. From the analysis of gene expression profiles, we observed a noticeable up-regulation in the expression of 1L1R2 (an anti-inflammatory receptor) and RETN (an immunosuppressive marker) genes in monocytes among prior users of ACE inhibitors.

Conclusion

Overall, the findings do not support the discontinuation of ACEi or ARB treatment and suggest that ACEi may moderate the COVID-19 hyperinflammatory response.

Patients with hypertension hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia using angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers or other antihypertensives: retrospective analysis of 435 patients

BACKGROUND

The angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely used for the treatment of hypertension (HT). Whether the use of these drugs increases the infectivity of novel coronavirus and results in an additional risk for morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 is a matter of interest.

OBJECTIVES

Assess the effect of ACEI/ARBs compared with other hypertensives on the clinical course and outcome in COVID-19 pneumonia.

DESIGN

Retrospective.

SETTINGS

Tertiary care hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We collected data on adult inpatients with COVID-19 pneumonia using ACEI/ARBs versus other antihypertensives between 15 March 2020, and 15 February 2021.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Severity, clinical course, mortality, and time to PCR negativity between patients using ACEI/ARBs and other antihypertensives.

SAMPLE SIZE

435 RESULTS: ACEI/ARBs were used by 203 patients (46.6%) (median age: 71 [41-94] years), while 232 patients (53.4%) were using other antihypertensives (median age: 69 [22-93] years, P=.645 vs age of ACEI/ARB users). There were no statistically significant differences between the ACEI/ARBs users and non-users in the number of patients admitted to intensive care (65 cases [32%] vs. 74 cases [31.9%], P=.978), the median duration of stay in hospital (8 [1-54] days vs.7 [1-55] days, P=.806) the median duration of ICU stay (8 [1-40] days vs. 6 [1-25] days), and the mortality rate (48 cases [23.6%] vs. 61 [26.3%], P=.525). While the median days before transfer to the ICU was shorter in ACE/ARBI non-users (2 [1-15] days vs. 3 [1-21] days, P=.02), the difference was not important clinically. The median time to PCR negativity was similar in ACEI/ARBs users and non-users (13 [7-34] days for users and 13 [5-45] days for non-users), (P=.083).

CONCLUSIONS

ACEI/ARB use is probably unrelated to poor prognosis in COVID-19 pneumonia inpatients. ACEI/ARBs did not prolong the time to PCR negativity. We conclude that using ACEI/ARBs probably does not increase the infectivity of SARS-CoV-2.

LIMITATIONS

Pharmacological therapies were not discussed in detail. The use of corticosteroids may affect the time to PCR negativity. We could not analyze the effect of obesity because of a lack of data.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Renin-Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors in Primary Prevention and COVID-19

Background

Considering the widespread risk of collider bias and confounding by indication in previous research, the associations between renin‐angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor use and COVID‐19 remain unknown. Accordingly, this study tested the hypothesis that RAAS inhibitors influence the summation effect of COVID‐19 and its progression to severe outcomes.

Methods and Results

This nationwide cohort study compared all residents of Sweden, without prior cardiovascular disease, in monotherapy (as of January 1, 2020) with a RAAS inhibitor to those using a calcium channel blocker or a thiazide diuretic. Comparative cohorts were balanced using machine‐learning‐derived propensity score methods. Of 165 355 people in the analysis (51% women), 367 were hospitalized or died with COVID‐19 (246 using a RAAS inhibitor versus 121 using a calcium channel blocker or thiazide diuretic; Cox proportional hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74–1.27). When each outcome was assessed separately, 335 people were hospitalized with COVID‐19 (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70–1.22), and 64 died with COVID‐19 (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.68–2.19). The severity of COVID‐19 outcomes did not differ between those using a RAAS inhibitor and those using a calcium channel blocker or thiazide diuretic (ordered logistic regression odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.89–1.14).

Conclusions

Despite potential limitations, this study is among the best available evidence that RAAS inhibitor use in primary prevention does not increase the risk of severe COVID‐19 outcomes; presenting strong data from which scientists and policy makers alike can base, with greater confidence, their current position on the safety of using RAAS inhibitors during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Safety and Efficacy of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors in COVID-19 Population

INTRODUCTION

The safety of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) among COVID-19 patients has been controversial since the onset of the pandemic.

METHODS

Digital databases were queried to study the safety of RAASi in COVID-19. The primary outcome of interest was mortality. The secondary outcome was seropositivity improvement/viral clearance, clinical manifestation progression, and progression to intensive care units. A random-effect model was used to compute an unadjusted odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

A total of 49 observational studies were included in the analysis consisting of 83,269 COVID-19 patients (RAASi n = 34,691; non-RAASi n = 48,578). The mean age of the sample was 64, and 56% were males. We found that RAASi was associated with similar mortality outcomes as compared to non-RAASi groups (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.99-1.15; p > 0.05). RAASi was associated with seropositivity improvement including negative RT-PCR or antibodies, (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.93-0.99; p < 0.05). There was no association between RAASi versus control with progression to ICU admission (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.79-1.23; p > 0.05) or higher odds of worsening of clinical manifestations (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.11; p > 0.05). Metaregression analysis did not change our outcomes for effect modifiers including age, sex, comorbidities, RAASi type, or study type on outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 is not a contraindication to hold or discontinue RAASi as they are not associated with higher mortality or worsening symptoms. Continuation of RAASi might be associated with favorable outcomes in COVID-19, including seropositivity/viral clearance.

The Impact of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) Expression on the Incidence and Severity of COVID-19 Infection

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to an unprecedented threat to the international community and raised major concerns in terms of public health safety. Although our current understanding of the complexity of COVID-19 pathogenesis remains limited, the infection is largely mediated by the interaction of viral spike protein and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). The functional importance of ACE2 in different demographic and comorbid conditions may explain the significant variation in incidence and mortality of COVID-19 in vulnerable groups, and highlights its candidacy as a potential therapeutic target. We provide evidence supporting the idea that differences in incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection may be related to ACE2. Emerging data based on the prevalence and severity of COVID-19 among those with established high levels of ACE2 expression strongly support our hypothesis. Considering the burden of COVID-19 infection in these vulnerable groups and the impact of the potential therapeutic and preventive measures that would result from adopting ACE2-driven anti-viral strategies, our hypothesis may expedite global efforts to control the current COVID-19 pandemic.